This has been ongoing since I've been a member.

Someone will reply to a long-dead thread, and everyone online will jump on it.

There needs to be some point in time where a thread could be reasonably suggested as "dead"; aka no responses in a 30-day period (or whatever timeframe, 30 days is just a suggestion).

If a reply is attempted to be made to a "dead thread", the reply is posted to a new thread with an automatic link to the historical thread.

 

This is a common request on vBulletin communities and demonstrates a limitation of the current implementation of the vBulletin software.

There is no option to "lock after X days inactivity". There is an add-on to "lock after X days" but it is not tied to the thread activity therefore you could have the thread locked whilst still active.

The only other way we have discussed is to manually go through the forums and lock all threads over a certain age. Obvious this is labourious task for both the initial "locking phase" and subsequently keeping on top of it. I support this idea wholly, but there doesn't appear to be a simple solution.

It is seemingly not a difficult thing to manually implement, but I am not a web developer so couldn't be more specific than that.

Dave

 

One solution is pretty simple, point how old it is. Something a lot of us already do.

 

Why would anyone care about this? Age has nothing to do with the interest of a topic. As long as the new comment or question is really in line with the topic of the original thread, and especially if the new comment has enough interest to generate additional new comments then why not just let it happen?

 

If the purpose of the forum Is build an A.A.C. book all the valuable
Information should remain.A lot of members find a lot resources In
old post. There Is a vast amount of Information that can be found.
The E-guys should be for this,It not a problem to have someone lach
on to an old post. They are searching and learning when this happens,
so Instead of trying to defeat It embrace It as a learning moment for
a new member and reminder to some members that this resource
exsist.

 

Thinking it over some more, I guess I want to amend my opinion a bit.

If, say, Joe asks a question, then a year later Bob just wants to answer Joe's question, then that revival of an old thread probably doesn't make any sense, as Joe is probably not looking for the answer any more.

But if Bob wants to ask a question, so he queries the forum for previous related threads as the FAQs suggest, he finds Joe's old thread on the exact same topic and attaches his question to Joes old post then that would seem to me like a valid use of an old post.

In general, I agree with loosewire - it seems to me it's a lot more disruptive to jump into a lively discussion and declare a topic "old and dead" than it would be to let a few members chat away on an old topic for awhile.

 

Its easy someone says, guys this an old post, job done.Like Davebee
says talk or go.

 

Why would anyone care about this? Age has nothing to do with the interest of a topic. As long as the new comment or question is really in line with the topic of the original thread, and especially if the new comment has enough interest to generate additional new comments then why not just let it happen?

I'm guessing the real problem is with those threads that someone answers as if it's a new post. Those are really annoying. For example, three years ago someone needed to solve a problem urgently. The feedback resolved the persons quandry, but for some reason someone feels that it is necessary to provide further feedback 3 years after the fact. Sometimes people follow up, just assuming it's a new post, and then someone else has to remind everyone that it's an old thread. .... It's just a waste of time.

 

Getting Involved Is never a waste of time,It may help some one.

 

Getting Involved Is never a waste of time,It may help some one.

It may help someone, that's true. But, it also may annoy someone. We are all busy and if we spend time on something noncritical, that's not a good thing. In some cases it's no problem, but in other cases it's annoying. I think it's the lattter cases that the good SgtWookie is talking about.

 

Indepentant opinion are worth some thing,we can agree to disagree
everyone get there say,but we are faced with a good but reasonable solutions
for the good of all.

 

It is a lot better, and it is this forums policy, to start a new thread. That way people are addressing your problem, and not confusing data from someone elses. You can show a link to the previous post, to show you have researched the issue.

The mods are kept pretty busy on this, it would be interesting to hear from them. Me, I flag em as I see em, and let the mods do their thing.

 

Tough love,the mod are monitoring It give them a break to enjoy the Milestones with us.

 

It is a lot better, and it is this forums policy, to start a new thread. That way people are addressing your problem, and not confusing data from someone elses. You can show a link to the previous post, to show you have researched the issue.

The mods are kept pretty busy on this, it would be interesting to hear from them. Me, I flag em as I see em, and let the mods do their thing.

If find this to be an excellent solution, and the forum helps with this. When you start a new thread and when you enter your topic, it automatically searches for similar topics that may be similar to the one you intend to post. So, It is encouraged that you search back with similar posts to see if they will help you with your topic. But, if someone posts on a very old thread because their topic is slightly different, no one is going to know what their talking about (for those who didn't read it)! Therefore, a simple solution is to address a new thread and say "This has been mentioned before but I would like to ask a slightly different question concerning the same topic," and then just add the link so everyone can view it. It will make everyone's lives easier, including the mods!

Austin